(1) Number of species in both datasets split up by group

(2) Looking at the total difference in area (km2) for each species range map in both datasets

There are large differences so to get a better sense, here is the same comparison but with area log transformed.

Data split into species groups and by IUCN category ***

(3) Looking at the overlap between species range maps from IUCN and AquaMaps

This plot shows the total percent of a species range map that is (1) only covered by IUCN cells, (2) only covered by AquaMaps cells and (3) covered by both IUCN and AquaMaps cells.

How this breaks down between AquaMaps and IUCN

Here is an example of a single species, the yellow speckled chromis (Chromis alpha)

## [1] "19.52% of the total area in this map is covered by both IUCN and AquaMaps"
## [1] "3.18% of the total area in this map is covered just by AquaMaps"
## [1] "77.3% of the total area in this map is covered just by IUCN"

Now looking across all species, here is the breakdown of how much overlap there is between the two datasets

This plot shows that the majority of species range maps have only ~30% of their full map covered by both maps, and almost no species have more than 50% of their two ranges (IUCN and AquaMaps) overlapping.

Split up by species - not sure if this is useful or not

Looking at the percent of smaller species range that is within the larger range.

## Warning: Removed 7 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

## Warning: Removed 7 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

## Warning: Removed 7 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

##      Min.   1st Qu.    Median      Mean   3rd Qu.      Max. 
##     55760   3032000  10790000  18500000  22670000 372100000
## Warning: Removed 1 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

## Warning: Removed 1 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

## Warning: Removed 2 rows containing missing values (geom_point).

## Warning: Removed 3 rows containing missing values (geom_point).